>The standard can be changed, it's just that manufacturers have to agree between themselves on the new standard.

If an agreement of all manufacturers is needed before introducing a new standard in production, it means that it will be delayed by the lowest common denominator of manufacturers until many years later. Which isn't good for the consumer, because they could've gotten a new superior charging standard on their phones many years earlier, as opposed to waiting multiple years until all manufacturers adopt it.

The agreement doesn't need to be unanimous. And it's fine for the agreement to be "just use whatever the latest small form factor USB collector is" which has been the de facto Android standard since the beginning.

It sounds like you're arguing that the lowest common denominator phone manufacturer will be holding up progress. But the connector is the easiest part, especially if it's a truly ubiquitous standard, because it will be heavily commoditized. The lowest common denominator phone manufacturer will just buy whatever the cheapest connector from China is, and this will almost always be whatever connector is most common.

My argument is that charging is at this point a mature technology, we have a charging standard up to 100w. Do you expect future phones to draw more? What possible improvements could future charging standard have, as far as a mobile phone goes?

And yes, it is pretty normal to have manufacturers sit round a table and agree standards -most ports on a computer, 4g wireless, etc.

You cant even come up with your own phone communication standard - countries allocate frequency specifically for 4g or 5g, none will give you a frequency band for a proprietary communication standard.

Apple can still implement proprietary technology in an USB-C charging cable that allows their phones to be charged much faster than others, as long as their device can still be charged by a generic cable and vice versa (without the added benefits).

Wow so now every time that Apple gets ready to introduce a new connector they have to wait for the entire industry to agree to it?

But guess what? Only the end connecting to the wall is standard, the end connecting to devices in the house are far from standard. How is this different than iPhones?

Usb type c is a connector type. Not a protocol, you are able to run different protocol through the same physical line as long as both side understands it. PD, HDMI, miniDP, PCIE, earphone, and probably other device run through the exact same line with different protocol. And vendor is also allowed to add their own one. Apple also don't need to accept all protocols above except charging. What is the point to introduce new connector type every single time you want to add new compatibility? To earn more money from selling gadget?

Yet the iPad has a different connector type for attached keyboards.

Are you saying that no one will ever need anything besides USB C?

I am not sure I understand your argument "my toaster does not have a standard connector, so neither should my iphone"? I mean, maybe they should, or maybe none cares to regulate toasters. Or maybe its only relevant to portable electronics, so laptops should have them but toasters shouldn't.

Think a bit broader - if apple wants to introduce a new phone communication standard, like 5g but different? It can't - frequencies are allocated for a specific purpose, and none will give you any for a proprietary protocol only you control.

This is not such a revolutionary idea if you look at a broader picture

If Apple introduced a phone that didn’t comply with the 5G standard it wouldn’t be able to interoperate and would be less useful.

But the government didn’t mandate that iMessage had to be compatible with SMS (even though it is somewhat) nor did they mandate that AirDrop had to interoperate with a standard.

Should the government also mandate a standard messaging protocol must be used or that it has to work with SMS?

Should FaceTime be forced to be interoperable?

Apple would not even be allowed to sell a phone that had a standard it invented in house, as it would cause interference with other radio equipment.

Radio frequencies are some of the most strictly regulated things on the planet, and misusing them will land you in jail in most countries.

The right to use radio frequencies are auctioned by the government. If Apple bought the rights to use the frequencies it could do whatever it wanted with them.

For instance, Sprint had WiMAX for 4G before they had LTE, two carriers have GSM and two have CDMA. The government didn’t mandate the protocols nor did they force the carriers to use the same protocol or the phone makers to support both.

You also had the proprietary Nextel push to talk.

Government absolutely do care what you do with the frequencies. The UK government auctioned 5G frequencies for a specific purpose. It took great pains to clear these frequencies, they weren't just lying around unused.

All the protocols you listed are open for adoption by various manufacturers. Apple absolutely would not be allowed to use them for a private protocol they keep to themselves. Airwaves are a public good, not private property. They even come with coverage obligations.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/media/media-rele...

But yet, we have an existence proof that a cellular carrier in the US - Sprint - had its own 4G protocol - WiMAX - that was only supported by Sprint

https://www.rcrwireless.com/20160401/opinion/worst-week-bold...

Not only that, even before Sprint acquired Nextel, Nextel was using the spectrum it had for its own proprietary wireless protocols and it wasn’t Big Government that killed either initiative - it was people exercising their own free will not buying Nextel phones and later WiMAX phones.

Most would link Sprint’s WiMAX decision back to its acquisition of Nextel Communications, which wrapped in 2005, and brought with it a significant load of 2.5 GHz spectrum licenses with specific build out dates. Nextel prior to being acquired had been testing various IP-based mobile broadband technologies, including various proprietary ones like Flash-OFDM and TDD-UMTS, as well as WiMAX and HSDPA.

> Should the government also mandate a standard messaging protocol must be used or that it has to work with SMS?

Wait, are there places in the EU where is SMS is still that popular?

Is this the new version of the old Slashdot meme - “Does anyone still watch TV? I haven’t owned a TV in 15 years.”

https://www.smseagle.eu/2017/03/06/daily-sms-mobile-statisti...

No I'm genuinely asking whether and where SMS is still that popular in the Europe (your link talks about US and "worldwide"). I know many/most people in the US use SMS text for messaging.

But as far as I'm aware in Europe everybody is on WhatsApp, Telegram or something similar that uses data. But maybe I'm wrong and there's still some holdout EU country still texting, that is why I asked. But they generally all have pretty good data plans.

You did see the part about 4.2 billion people use SMS daily? What’s the likelihood that that doesn’t include the EU.